My Name is Paul H Cosentino. I started this Blog in 2011 because of what I believe to be wrongdoings in town government. This Blog is to keep the citizens of Templeton informed. It is also for the citizens of Templeton to post their comments and concerns.

Paul working for you.

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Confusion surrounds implementation of recreational pot law

Confusion surrounds implementation of recreational pot law

Saturday

Posted Apr 1, 2017 at 7:00 PMUpdated Apr 3, 2017 at 6:01 PM

By
Mina Corpuz, Special to the Telegram & Gazette
First of three parts
BOSTON – Conflicting
proposals from state lawmakers to implement the recreational marijuana
law voters passed last fall has left Massachusetts cities and towns
struggling to cope with confusion, and calls into question whether the
regulated industry will be in place by next summer.

And that’s before lawmakers deal with signals from Washington, D.C.,
that the Trump administration may enforce an overall federal ban on
marijuana sale and use.

The state legislature’s Joint Committee
on Marijuana Policy and the treasurer’s office are leading the effort to
figure out regulation, structure and methods to set up the framework
before July 2018.

The November ballot question that supports
taxing and regulating marijuana passed with about 53 percent of the
vote. The measure allows adults older than 21 to smoke, purchase and
grow some marijuana at home.

“There’s
a lot of people (who are) very, very interested and have a variety of
opinions and a variety of facts,” said Sen. Patricia Jehlen, who
co-chairs the Joint Committee on Marijuana Policy. “We’re trying to
understand some things, but we are trying to stick to the will of the
voters and make any adjustments that are necessary.”

Jehlen,
D-Somerville, has supported legalization while co-chair Rep. Mark
Cusack, D-Braintree, has declined to say how he voted for the measure.

Since
mid-December, adults in the Bay State have been able to possess and use
marijuana, but not sell it. Shops were initially scheduled to open in
January 2018.

The Department of Revenue estimates that the state could reap up to
$172 million in annual tax revenue from recreational marijuana sales.

Buyers
would have to pay the state’s 6.25 percent sales tax and an additional
tax of 3.75 percent, which is lower than rates in other states with
legalized marijuana. Municipalities also can choose to tax 2 percent on
top of sales and excise taxes.

Conflict between regulation, legislation

The
marijuana policy committee is working on an omnibus bill expected in
June that would help address issues related to the ballot initiative.

Nearly 50 bills have been referred to the committee, which held its first public hearing March 20.
Some
legislation calls for repealing the referendum entirely and several
bills want changes to the law passed by voters, including raising the
usage age from 21 to 25 and limiting the number of plants people can
grow at home.

Yes on 4 supporters have asked the committee to
defer action on legislation until the Cannabis Control Commission, the
regulatory body proposed in the ballot, starts writing regulations.

The commission is unseated and needs funding to operate.

House
co-chair Cusack had a brief exchange with Yes on 4 Campaign Director
Will Luzier at the hearing about which group is supposed to initiate any
tweaks to the marijuana law.

“In no way do we want to curtail
any of your legislative duties,” Luzier said. “We’re saying the proper
sequence is to form those legislative duties after you get the
recommendations from the group.”

Setting up regulated industry

Treasurer Deborah Goldberg has been preparing for shop licensing for the past year and a half.
In
December, lawmakers voted to push the opening date for marijuana stores
from January to July 2018. The six-month delay gives Goldberg’s office
more time to get the industry running.

“Even though the six-month
extension was enacted, we still need to keep moving forward quickly,
because we will need every bit of that time,” she said in her testimony
for the committee. “The six months was not a pause or we will not be
ready even with the new deadline.”

Goldberg’s office, which will oversee the Cannabis Control
Commission, has requested money to fund the regulatory body and seat
three commissioners, an action shared by supporters of the ballot
measure.

Legislators are considering whether to model the
commission after the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, which is
under the Treasury, or one like the Gaming Commission, which is
independent.

“I don’t want to give any impression that we don’t
appreciate all the work that the treasurer has been doing to get ready,
so we want to recognize that,” Jehlen said, “but we want to make sure we
have a good model moving forward.”

Greater federal enforcement

Despite
efforts to create a regulated industry and figure out how to oversee
it, the federal government could derail the state’s work.

White
House leaders, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, are interested
in greater enforcement against marijuana, which could affect the states
that have legalized recreational marijuana.

White House Press
Secretary Sean Spicer said the administration doesn’t have a problem
with medical use because it has a purpose and clear guidelines to
process and regulate use. Any other drug use is still considered
illegal, he said.

“I think that when you see something like the opioid addiction crisis
blossoming in so many states around this country, the last thing that
we should be doing is encouraging people,” Spicer said at a February
press conference.

Communities want clarification

The
initiative allows municipalities to bar marijuana shops by majority
vote, yet several cities and towns have expressed concern it is unclear
about what they can or cannot do.

Jehlen said some communities
have had trouble understanding the wording in the law passed on the
ballot. The committee will consult with the Massachusetts Municipal
Association and the Secretary of State’s office to provide some clarity,
she said.

Westboro was the first town to vote to block marijuana
stores. Town officials reached out to the Attorney General’s office
about the language to use in its bylaws.

Communities can use Westboro’s opt-out laws as an example in the meantime, Jehlen said.
As
the state grapples with implementing the recreational marijuana law,
cities and towns that struggled with medical marijuana implementation
are experiencing a similar confusion and lengthy process.

About 63 percent of voters supported medical marijuana passed by
ballot vote in 2012, according to the Secretary of State’s office.

One
significant difference between the laws is the opt-out process. The
recreational law allows voters to decide in a referendum. The medical
marijuana law requires a letter of support or non-opposition from the
community signed either by the chief executive officer/chief
administrative officer, or the City Council, Board of Aldermen or Board
of Selectmen.

As a result, it took nearly three years for the
first dispensary to open in Salem. Nine dispensaries have been approved
to sell and about 200 that have applied since 2015 are still in the
approval process, according to the Department of Public Health, which
oversees the medicinal marijuana program.
DPH estimates that entire process of licensing, testing, building and inspecting can take up to a year and a half.

“I
think people are disappointed that it took a long time to get up and
running and perhaps we and learn from those experiences,” Jehlen said.

Moving forward

Jehlen said the committee will continue to have conversations with groups and individuals. There are two remaining hearings.

She expects to work with the Cannabis Control Commission and get feedback if adjustments are needed to the law.

The
committee members may visit some existing commercial grow-and-retail
medical marijuana facilities to help envision what the recreational
system may look like.

Jehlen said taking many perspectives and proposals into consideration will help the committee make its decision.

“Everybody
wants to protect the public health and safety and everybody wants to
avoid young people having access,” she said. “Those are areas of great
common agreement and there (are) areas of disagreement in some of the
methods of doing that, but I think that all of us want that outcome.”